St. Paul daily globe., 1887-06-24
INTERSTATE.
Gen. Buffers Arguments. for the
Burton COmDany.

Burton Company.
WASHINGTON, June 23.-Gen. Butler.
representing the Burton Car company.
addressed the interstate commerce com
mission this morning. He attacked the
testimony of General Manager Stone.
of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy
read, in certain particulars, citing the
dimensions of the Burton car to show
that its capacity for carrying railroad
ties (for example) was greater than that
OF ordinary cars, contrary to the state
ment OF Mr. Stone. From the witness
Inc0rrectneSS, as Gen. Butler claimed.
In this respect, he argued the general
untruStwOrthineSS of Mr.. Stones testi-
mOny. He reviewed the testimony on
other witnesses in respect to the dam
aged condition of stock transported i'm
the ordinary car, declaring that the
Suf1erlngS of the animals produced
disease Which i'll turn affected the
health OF the consumer. He admitted
that II any objection had been made to
the Burton cars, because of alleged
want OF strength, that would be legiti-
mate, but the charge of S cents mile
would not make the cars stronger. and
as a matter of fact none of the Burton
cars had broken down. The roads ac-
cepted coal cars and Oil cars from any
body without discrimination. He had
seen long circus cars, embOdying all
sorts of things. Look in the railroad
circulars and see if they were classed
among those whose owners were to he
charged extra for the hauling. The tes-
timony showed that the roads accepted
every kind CT cars except what they
chose to call the Palace cattle car. The
Lake Shore company would not take
1Tfn OF oil
beyond all question. A shipper who
from Chicago to Cleveland i'm a
Burton ear was informed by the agent of
the road i'll writing that he could not
get Burton car over the road. That
was directly in the face of the law. The
testimony he submitted showed that
all the respondents had Disseminated
against the Burton company. The ag-
gregate of the extra charge against the
Burton cars amounted to a discrimina-
ton OF 81 per cent. All the beef for
Europe and the East as far as the i'm
proved cars could carry it was trans
ported East OF Chicago without any dis
elimination. Over 100 roads were haul
ing these cars without question. The
the commission for damages. The
courts were opened for the trial of
question of damages. The company
camt here for the purpose of righting a
public wrong. He cited authorities i'm
support of his claim that the road had
no right to make determinations and de-
clare that the interstate commerce law
had not changed the condition of the
law in this respect.
1t had merely added, and added
vastly, to the means of enforcing the
law and detecting infractiOns thereof.
If the law was not carried out,
so MUCH THE WORSE
for the railroads. This law was ONLY a
roads would get would be an avalanche.
Writ Dexter, of Chicago, representing
the Chicago, Burlington d Quincy rail-
road, addressed the commission. No
shipper had appeared and offered evi-
dence that the roads had charged un-
usual or eXOrbitant rates, but a common
carrier, the owner of patent, came
asking an order which would force that
car over the roads. The law provides
that the roads should not be compelled
to afford the use of its5 terminal facili-
ties to its rivals engaged in like busi-
ness. The Burlington company is
common carrier, subject to the provi-
sionS of the law. and it seeks
the tracks of the respondents.
Now, the allegation was that the roads
did not haul the Burton cars at less
rate than was charged upon other patent
cars, and at less rates than in the opin-
ion of experts and railroad men were
profitable. This question, he submitted,
went to the value of the improvements.
The railroads adopted Improvements as
fast as they were proved to be practi-
cable and profitable. Was the commits
sion to try the values of patented de-
vices? Ii the power remained with the
commission to determine the kind of
car which must be used, why not the
kind of locomotive? Suppose that our
5000 cattle cars burlington line), should
be displaced would the commission give
the road other cars? Would it condemn
the stock of the road to disuse? Would
it take into consideration the question
of ordering withdrawal of those cars
at some future time? This case was
practically matter of the value of
the patent and was intended to
be such. Mr.. Stone had testi-
fed that the % of cent a mile
which tha railroads allow each Other for